TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 681X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot be sustained. The demand of service tax liability should be confined to the normal period - Since, there is no suppression of facts, penalty imposed under Section 78 on the appellant cannot be sustained - appeal allowed - decided partly in favor of appellant. - Service Tax Appeal No.74 of 2011 - ST/A/54461/2017-CU[DB] - Dated:- 10-4-2017 - Shri S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial And Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Shri A.K. Batra, C.A. for the appellant. Shri Ranjan Khanna, Authorized Representative (DR) for the Respondent. ORDER Per. S.K. Mohanty This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 15/10/2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Service Tax, New Delhi. 2. Brief facts of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of D. Pauls Consumer Benefit Limited Vs. CCE, New Delhi 2017 VIL 165 CESTAT DEL. ST against the appellant. However, he submits that there were divergent views by the judicial forums with regard to levy of service tax on the incentives received from various companies for providing CRS services. In this context, he relies on the judgment of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Travel Masters India (P.) Ltd. Vs. CST, Chennai reported in 2015 (40) S.T.R. 33 (Mad .) and the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) in the case of International Travel House Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. (Appeals) reported in 2014 (33) S.T.R. 606 (Commr. Appl.) and Starline Travels Ltd. Vs. Commr. (Appl.) reported in 2002 (27) S.T.R. 526 (C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... supra), the authorities below are justified in confirming the service tax demand against the present appellant. 5. Heard both the sides and examined the case records. 6. We find that the issue regarding classification of CRS service under the category of Business Auxiliary Service has already been decided in the case of D. Pauls (supra). Thus, the appellant is liable to pay service tax for the services provided to M/s GIPL and Abacus under the taxable category of Business Auxiliary Services. However, we find that the Commissioner (Appeals) in an identical set of facts, in the cases of International Travel House Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and Starline Travels Ltd. (supra), has set aside the adjudication order and allowed the appeal in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
